FOXCATER--UNBROKEN . . . MOVIE "The Interview" Spoof On KIM JONG UN, Young Leader of North Korea, Was Actually, Not Such a Bad Movie--Funny Parts, Tender Parts, Assassination Attempt Turned Down--Later Death Brought About Through Own Actions--And Self-Defense of Interviewers! Recommendations for Several Other Good Movies, THE HUNTER and PAIN & GAIN--True Story, Sad to Say! MONTANA LEGISLATURE NEEDS TO IGNORE BOOGIEMAN "CALLS" FOR 10,000 INDIAN WATER RIGHTS! Scare Tactics to Get You to Vote For the Compact in Fear of Doing More Damage By Not Voting for the Compact . . . Threats of Lawsuits Have NO FOUNDATION IN WATER LAW! MONTANA FISH & GAME COMMISSION TO MAINTAIN 12 STREAMS for FISH & WILDLIFE HABITATS. INDIANS NEED TO SIMPLY QUANTIFY ENOUGH WATER FOR THE USE & BENEFIT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE RESERVATION . . . THEY HAVE SENIOR WATER RIGHTS FROM 1855, BUT MANY HOMESTEADERS HAVE SENIOR WATER RIGHTS OR PRIORITY DATES THAT WERE BEFORE THE VESTING OF RIGHTS, AT THE TIME the United States Established the RESERVATION! VOTE "NO" on WATER COMPACT--WATER COURTS CAN HANDLE WATER ISSUES! GOOD LUCK! COPIED TEXT, RIGHT FROM "THE MONTANA CITIZEN'S GUIDE TO THE COURTS--WATER COURT SECTION--VERY INFORMATIVE! AND I ADDED A SECTION ON INDIAN LAW, BECAUSE, YOU CAN'T MAKE A PROPER DISCISION ON THE WATER COMPACT, UNLESS YOU ALSO HAVE A BASIC UNDERSTANDING OF INIDIAN LAW!

The Interview--Kim Jong Un, North Korea

This morning, at about 1:30 a.m., the Jefferson Line Bus, pulled into the Butte Trailway Station, and the manager here, started us out with a marathon of movies, to keep us entertained.  First we watched The Hunted, with Tommy Lee Jones, one of my favorite actors, and someone whom, I am sure gained a reputation from his stellar performance in the movie The Fugitive, as he hunted and tracked, Harrison Ford, the alleged doctor, who killed his wife, but was actually framed . . . and did this new movie, possibly inspired by the other earlier, Tommy Lee Jones, relentless hunter, ever remind me of two horrifying nights for me last week, while I was in Missoula, being tracked and hunted, roughly, one night, for almost a full 24 hours, wondering, what I might have been framed with, to bring such a concerted effort to catch me?  In The Fugitive, the doctor, played by Harrison, had to outsmart, Jones, and the rest of the U.S. Marshals, and basically prove his own innocence, as I feel that I am doing right now!  This new movie, is about a trained, contracted, mercenary, basically a killing machine, that Tommy Lee Jones trains, who is going on a killing spree, up in the northwest, brutally dissecting his victims, with a knife, using animal traps, and guerilla war tactics, that only Jones, knows how to deal with the mindset of one of his students, that is later, after he kills him, seen, as one of his sons, emphasized by the quote from when God, in the Bible, commands, Abraham to offer his son for a sacrifice, in semblance, of God offering, his only begotten son, Jesus Christ, as a sacrificial offering for the sins of the world . . . but there is a happier ending for Isaac, because an angel stays his father’s hand, and a ram is offered instead, not so with the soldier . . . good flick!  I would recommend it.

The next offering on the menu, was called, Pain & Gain, with Wahlberg, in a real life story, that, even the way it was filmed, almost seemed surreal, funny, and beyond believable, especially, the scene, when Wahlberg, a bodybuilder and several of his beefy friends, the rock, and another guy, try to kill the guy, they long to live his life style, with all his money, riches, mansions, cars, etc.  I think, we can gather from the story, that, it is harder to kill someone, that the movies, make it look.  There are about 3 or 4, terrible attempts, from putting him in a car, to running the car, with explosives into a building, then hitting him with a car, then running him over with a van . . . and beating him, torturing him, before that!  LOL!  I remember, one case in Utah, that was like this--a couple of drifters, a man and woman, come upon a remote farm/ranch operation, in central Utah, and hook up with the couple who owns the place, thinking they could work for awhile, earn some money, and head on down the road.  But the rancher couple, has other plans for the two, and decided to rob them of their belongings, and to dispose of the body, they think if they blow them up, the body parts will disintegrate, and just disappear or evaporate . . . not what happened.  After the explosion, cops found, noses, fingers, arms, and body parts, spread over a fourth of an acre or so, and the parts, started to stink, as decomposed bodies do, and I believe, that is how they caught the couple . . . this was 20 years ago, so, I might have confused the facts, but, that case, made me think of how really hard it is, not only to kill someone, but to get rid of the body!

Wahlberg is the ultimate, follow the gurus, with the motto, Get up off your lazy American ass, and be a can do person . . . he meets with client at the gym he works at, and starts to covet his life, and all that goes with it.  In fact, at one point, he says to the man, that he wants to be everything he is, and he does, what several women have done to me, literally takes your life, trying to eliminate you, in the process, and just like the dude in the movie, I am not as easy to kill, or get rid of as originally thought.  If fact, there is this sign on one of the buses in Missoula, that says, 5 Days and Done, I can just see, the cop controlled, paid staff, who seem easy to find, on any force, that are willing to go after me and get the money, perks, or the prestige of catching me, with the $10,000 bounty, and the alleged papers in 6 states, which is news to me!  But, none the less, in the movie, Ed Harrison, a retired cop, is contacted, as a private investigator, who brings down the ring of three men and one woman, who thinks Wahlberg and crew are CIA, she is foreign . . . the movie is done in such a way, that it seems to be fiction, but fact is always stranger than fiction . . . two of the three, get the death penalty, and the one Christian, who finds sympathy for the hostage, gets 15 years!  Both shows are really good, and worth seeing, as I have said, a thousand times, there are no short cuts to success!

The Interview, Shows, That We Humans Are More Alike Than Different, and Love/Sex is the Universal Language!

As the manager, was scrolling through the movies, he just happened to get a phone call, while going through hundreds of them, on whatever Netflix, or whatever service they have, but he had to leave, while the selection, had The Interview, which surprised me, due to the fact, that the movie seemed to have just come out, among all the controversy.  And I was again, surprised, that Columbia Pictures, not Sony, was the one who produced and released it, but maybe they are a subsidiary of Sony?  The movie was actually better than I had heard, and not as offensive, as I suspected.  There were actually some really funny parts, some stupid too, and some touching parts, that showed, the TV interviewer, Skylark, hanging out with Kim Jong Un, and just talking like two friends, who just met, might, playing basketball, driving a tank, and going after women, partying.  Un gives Skylark a dog, and the two hit is off so well, that Skylark, refuses to poison, Un, like the CIA want him to do, while his other friend, protests, saying that the young leader is just putting up a front, and later, it appears to be that way, when his own top aide, who falls in lust with the other American, that Kim, is a God to the people of North Korea, and if he is assassinated, there will just be another man to take his place, a brother, or someone else in the family, dynasty of three generations.

The thing that cracked me up, is just how American, the two TV producers and interviewers were, up for adventure, friendly, trusting, and questioning of the CIA, easily swayed to believe the image Un was putting forward, and ready to forgive and forget, making a new friend.  I have known guys, like Skylark, and they would totally roll with this scene and dig it too.  The Americans are bumbling, in their attempt to poison the leader, don’t follow the CIA rules, do their own thing, actually poison a security guard, who finds the poison, that is hidden in a bag of Skylark’s choosing, inside a package of gum.  Later the guard, dies, the way, Kim Jong Un, is suppose to die, a gruesome death, complete with vomiting and excreting all bodily fluids, from the dying body . . . not a pretty way to die.  Another thing, I liked about the movie, is the two Americans, become convinced, of Kim’s true nature, from an insider, rather than believing all they hear from the CIA.  And, rather than dying in an assassination attempt, he rather dies, due to his own doing, when he goes after the Americans, trying to blow up the tank, that he and Skylark, earlier test drove together.  So, not as offensive, as originally thought, or planned, but a result of actions, that led to consequences, done in an effort of self-defense . . . which we all agree with.  But, the movie, while corny, was somewhat, more realistic and touching to me, that I thought, even shed a tear, hoping that we can all see, the people of the earth, more like us, than different.  We all want to be respected, loved, have the necessities of life, be able to be self-actualized, and have our children, happy and protected.  I don’t think, humans demand, or most, much more than that, but I am an idealist!

Helping the World Keep Promises--Water Compact, Hellgate Treaty of 1855

Just a reminder . . . rumors, propoganda, threats, lawsuits, are just that, don't believe all you hear, the law is the law, is the law . . . know your rights!

• Powers Forbidden to States: United States Constitution, Article I, Section 10 [3]: No State, without the Consent of Congress . . . enter into an Agreement or Compact with, another State, or with a foreign Power . . .
• Montana Enabling Act: ARTICLE I

COMPACT WITH THE UNITED STATES

All provisions of the enabling act of Congress (approved February 22,1889,25 Stat. 676), as

amended and of Ordinance No. 1, appended to the Constitution of the state of Montana and

approved February 22,1889, including the agreement and declaration that all lands owned or held

by any Indian or Indian tribes shall remain under the absolute jurisdiction and control of the

congress of the United States, continue in full force and effect until revoked by the consent of the

United States and the people of Montana.

• Montana Constitution, Environment and Resource Management, Article IX, Section 3, Water Rights, (3) All surface, underground, flood, and atmospheric water within the boundary of the state and property of the state for use of its people and are subject to appropriation for beneficial uses as provided by law.
• Water Rights Act of 1973
• use water rights: water rights acquired by mainly appropriating and beneficially using water--right is generally the date the water was first put to use
• filed rights: water rights filed with local county clerk and recorder's offices
• decreed water rights: adjudicated in Water Court
• federal and Indian reserved rights: when the U.S. withdraws land from public domain and reserves it for federal purpose, either explicitly or by implication, it reserves appurtenant water, then unappropriated to extent . . . vesting at the date of the reservation, which is superior to future appropriators, reserved in navigable & non-navigable waters (not aboriginal rights)
• Murphy rights: Montana Fish and Game Commission to maintain 12 streams to protect the fish and wildlife habitats
• Water “call”: water rights are exercised in accordance with their order of priority, starting with the earliest (senior) rights and progressing to later (junior) rights, until the water is all appropriated--the earlier the priority date, the better the water right.  When water is in short demand, senior water right holders are entitled to use their water rights first.  They call the water right of a junior appropriator.  Junior right holders, can’t adversely affect senior rights.  However, if senior water right users can reasonably obtain their water even though junior use affects senior’s use in a significant way, seniors can’t demand junior appropriators stop using the water . . . unless, the junior is upstream from seniors.

Boogieman Threats of Indians “Calling” in 10,000 Water Rights Are Unfounded . . . Calls Are For Years When There is Not Enough Water . . . As Long as Indian, if holding Senior Rights, as of Reservation Establishing Dates, Hellgate Treaty of 1855, Have Sufficient Water for the Use and Benefit of the Purposes of the Reservation, Not More, They Have No “Calls”, Don’t Let Threats of Lawsuits Scare You . . . This is Well Established Law!

Vote “NO” on Flathead Water Compact!

The Montana Citizen's Guide to the Courts
WATER COURT

The Montana Water Court has jurisdiction to determine among competing claimants, who has the right to use water in Montana.  There is only the one Water Court, located in Bozeman, where the Chief Water Judge presides.  Under him there are four district water judges, who have their own courts.  there are 12 water masters who are attorneys supervised by the Chief Water Judge.  The masters do the majority of the adjudications work.  Any objections to the findings of a master are referred to the Chief Water Judge or to a district water judge.  

In Montana, to use either surface water or groundwater, a persona is required to have a legal right to do so.  the state Water Use Act of 1973 defines this as a water right.  This does not mean you own the water.  The State of Montana owns all waters in the state.

Water rights in Montana are property rights.  They are protected by the U.S. and Montana constitutions just like any other property right.  water rights have value, and water users cannot be deprived of their property without due process of law.

Not everyone has a legal right to use water in Montana.  the acquisition of water rights is based upon the Priority Appropriation Doctrine in Montana.  the first person to perfect a water right on a source has seniority over the next person and so on.

the water court decides competing claims for water based on the Prior Appropriation Doctrine and the legal sufficiency of a claim.  Water rights can be limited in various ways to allow someone to use only water that he has acquired a right for.

In Montana, a water user need only to put the water to a beneficial use to have a water right.  A beneficial use is a use of water for the benefit of the appropriator, other persons, or the public, including but not limited to agricultural, stock,water, domestic, fish and wildlife, industrial, irrigation, mining, municipal, power, and recreational uses.  You can legally use city water delivered to your faucet because the city holds a water right.  You don't have the right to drill a well in many Montana cities because you don't hold the groundwater rights.

The Water Court follows the same rules and laws of the local district court.  In addition, the Water Cort follows specific rules adopted by the Montana Supreme Court.

Law on Montana's Indian Reservations

Tribal law and jurisdiction is complicated and varies based on:

• Who are the parties to the action (Indian or non-Indian)
• Where the act occurred (within Indian Country, outside of Indian Country, or fee or trust land within Indian Country)
• What type of action is involved ( civil, criminal--again it varies depending on status of the parties and victim)
• Whether the act in question affects a tribe's sovereignty (often balanced against state and federal interests)

In Montana, there are seven Indian reservations; each makes and enforces its own laws subject to any compacts with the state, or with federal laws and regulations.  Tribal law varies based on how the tribal government was established (by treaty or executive order), the provisions of tribal constitutions, and tribal legislative enactments and administrative rules.

Each of the tribes located within Montana has its own tribal courts which operate in a manner similar to what takes place in federal or state district courts--but tribal courts also reflect the unique needs of each tribal culture.

Common areas of controversy between tribes, states, and the federal government include jurisdictional determinations, gaming activities, taxation issues, Indian Child Welfare Act matters, water rights, and hunting/fishing/gathering rights.  A person's ability to determine what forum has jurisdiction to hear a matter regarding tribal people, tribal lands, or tribal rights depends on analyzing a variety of factors.  Since there are virtually no easy rules in federal Indian law--and tribal law varies from tribe to tribe--it is important to understand what legal principles apply to any given situation when evaluating whether a matter may be properly brought in the tribal judicial system.

Hope This Gives Legislators & Other People a Better Understanding of Indian and Water Law!